Screening and brief intervention for drug use in primary care: the ASPIRE randomized clinical trial

Feasibility of implementing a screening tool for risk of opioid misuse in a trauma surgical population

Background

As the opioid crisis continues to affect communities across the United States, new interventions for screening and prevention are needed to mitigate its impact. Mental health diagnoses have been identified as a risk factor for opioid misuse, and surgical populations and injury survivors are at high risk for prolonged opioid use and misuse. This study investigated the implementation of a novel opioid risk screening tool that incorporated putative risk factors from a recent study in four trauma units across Wisconsin.

Method

The screening tool was implemented across a 6-month period at four sites. Data was collected via monthly meeting notes and "Plan, Do, Study, Act" (PDSA) forms. Following implementation, focus groups reflected on the facilitators and barriers to implementation. Meeting notes, PDSA forms, and focus group data were analyzed using the consolidated framework for implementation research, followed by thematic analyses, to generate themes surrounding the facilitators and barriers to implementing an opioid misuse screener.

Results

Implementation facilitators included ensuring patient understanding of the screener, minimizing staff burden from screening, and educating staff to encourage engagement. Barriers included infrastructure limitations that prevented seamless administration of the screener within current workflows, overlap of the screener with existing measures, and lack of guidance surrounding treatment options corresponding to risk. Recommended solutions to address barriers include careful timing of screener administration, accommodating workflows, integration of the screening tool within the electronic health record, and evidence-based interventions guided by screener results.

Conclusion

Four trauma centers across Wisconsin successfully implemented a pilot opioid misuse screening tool. Trauma providers and unit staff members believe that this tool would be a beneficial addition to their repertoire if their recommendations were adopted. Future research should refine opioid misuse risk factors and ensure screening items are well-validated with psychometric research supporting treatment responses to screener-indicated risk categories.

Motivational interviewing for substance use reduction

BACKGROUND

Substance use is a global issue, with around 30 to 35 million individuals estimated to have a substance-use disorder. Motivational interviewing (MI) is a client-centred method that aims to strengthen a person's motivation and commitment to a specific goal by exploring their reasons for change and resolving ambivalence, in an atmosphere of acceptance and compassion. This review updates the 2011 version by Smedslund and colleagues.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of motivational interviewing for substance use on the extent of substance use, readiness to change, and retention in treatment.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched 18 electronic databases, six websites, four mailing lists, and the reference lists of included studies and reviews. The last search dates were in February 2021 and November 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials with individuals using drugs, alcohol, or both. Interventions were MI or motivational enhancement therapy (MET), delivered individually and face to face. Eligible control interventions were no intervention, treatment as usual, assessment and feedback, or other active intervention.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane, and assessed the certainty of evidence with GRADE. We conducted meta-analyses for the three outcomes (extent of substance use, readiness to change, retention in treatment) at four time points (post-intervention, short-, medium-, and long-term follow-up).

MAIN RESULTS

We included 93 studies with 22,776 participants. MI was delivered in one to nine sessions. Session durations varied, from as little as 10 minutes to as long as 148 minutes per session, across included studies. Study settings included inpatient and outpatient clinics, universities, army recruitment centres, veterans' health centres, and prisons. We judged 69 studies to be at high risk of bias in at least one domain and 24 studies to be at low or unclear risk. Comparing MI to no intervention revealed a small to moderate effect of MI in substance use post-intervention (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.48, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.07 to 0.89; I2 = 75%; 6 studies, 471 participants; low-certainty evidence). The effect was weaker at short-term follow-up (SMD 0.20, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.28; 19 studies, 3351 participants; very low-certainty evidence). This comparison revealed a difference in favour of MI at medium-term follow-up (SMD 0.12, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.20; 16 studies, 3137 participants; low-certainty evidence) and no difference at long-term follow-up (SMD 0.12, 95% CI -0.00 to 0.25; 9 studies, 1525 participants; very low-certainty evidence). There was no difference in readiness to change (SMD 0.05, 95% CI -0.11 to 0.22; 5 studies, 1495 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Retention in treatment was slightly higher with MI (SMD 0.26, 95% CI -0.00 to 0.52; 2 studies, 427 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Comparing MI to treatment as usual revealed a very small negative effect in substance use post-intervention (SMD -0.14, 95% CI -0.27 to -0.02; 5 studies, 976 participants; very low-certainty evidence). There was no difference at short-term follow-up (SMD 0.07, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.17; 14 studies, 3066 participants), a very small benefit of MI at medium-term follow-up (SMD 0.12, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.22; 9 studies, 1624 participants), and no difference at long-term follow-up (SMD 0.06, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.17; 8 studies, 1449 participants), all with low-certainty evidence. There was no difference in readiness to change (SMD 0.06, 95% CI -0.27 to 0.39; 2 studies, 150 participants) and retention in treatment (SMD -0.09, 95% CI -0.34 to 0.16; 5 studies, 1295 participants), both with very low-certainty evidence. Comparing MI to assessment and feedback revealed no difference in substance use at short-term follow-up (SMD 0.09, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.23; 7 studies, 854 participants; low-certainty evidence). A small benefit for MI was shown at medium-term (SMD 0.24, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.40; 6 studies, 688 participants) and long-term follow-up (SMD 0.24, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.41; 3 studies, 448 participants), both with moderate-certainty evidence. None of the studies in this comparison measured substance use at the post-intervention time point, readiness to change, and retention in treatment. Comparing MI to another active intervention revealed no difference in substance use at any follow-up time point, all with low-certainty evidence: post-intervention (SMD 0.07, 95% CI -0.15 to 0.29; 3 studies, 338 participants); short-term (SMD 0.05, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.13; 18 studies, 2795 participants); medium-term (SMD 0.08, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.17; 15 studies, 2352 participants); and long-term follow-up (SMD 0.03, 95% CI -0.07 to 0.13; 10 studies, 1908 participants). There was no difference in readiness to change (SMD 0.15, 95% CI -0.00 to 0.30; 5 studies, 988 participants; low-certainty evidence) and retention in treatment (SMD -0.04, 95% CI -0.23 to 0.14; 12 studies, 1945 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). We downgraded the certainty of evidence due to inconsistency, study limitations, publication bias, and imprecision.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Motivational interviewing may reduce substance use compared with no intervention up to a short follow-up period. MI probably reduces substance use slightly compared with assessment and feedback over medium- and long-term periods. MI may make little to no difference to substance use compared to treatment as usual and another active intervention. It is unclear if MI has an effect on readiness to change and retention in treatment. The studies included in this review were heterogeneous in many respects, including the characteristics of participants, substance(s) used, and interventions. Given the widespread use of MI and the many studies examining MI, it is very important that counsellors adhere to and report quality conditions so that only studies in which the intervention implemented was actually MI are included in evidence syntheses and systematic reviews. Overall, we have moderate to no confidence in the evidence, which forces us to be careful about our conclusions. Consequently, future studies are likely to change the findings and conclusions of this review.

Subthreshold opioid use disorder prevention (STOP) trial: a cluster randomized clinical trial: study design and methods

BACKGROUND

Preventing progression to moderate or severe opioid use disorder (OUD) among people who exhibit risky opioid use behavior that does not meet criteria for treatment with opioid agonists or antagonists (subthreshold OUD) is poorly understood. The Subthreshold Opioid Use Disorder Prevention (STOP) Trial is designed to study the efficacy of a collaborative care intervention to reduce risky opioid use and to prevent progression to moderate or severe OUD in adult primary care patients with subthreshold OUD.

METHODS

The STOP trial is a cluster randomized controlled trial, randomized at the PCP level, conducted in 5 distinct geographic sites. STOP tests the efficacy of the STOP intervention in comparison to enhanced usual care (EUC) in adult primary care patients with risky opioid use that does not meet criteria for moderate-severe OUD. The STOP intervention consists of (1) a practice-embedded nurse care manager (NCM) who provides patient participant education and supports primary care providers (PCPs) in engaging and monitoring patient-participants; (2) brief advice, delivered to patient participants by their PCP and/or prerecorded video message, about health risks of opioid misuse; and (3) up to 6 sessions of telephone health coaching to motivate and support behavior change. EUC consists of primary care treatment as usual, plus printed overdose prevention educational materials and an educational video on cancer screening. The primary outcome measure is self-reported number of days of risky (illicit or nonmedical) opioid use over 180 days, assessed monthly via text message using items from the Addiction Severity Index and the Current Opioid Misuse Measure. Secondary outcomes assess other substance use, mental health, quality of life, and healthcare utilization as well as PCP prescribing and monitoring behaviors. A mixed effects negative binomial model with a log link will be fit to estimate the difference in means between treatment and control groups using an intent-to-treat population.

DISCUSSION

Given a growing interest in interventions for the management of patients with risky opioid use, and the need for primary care-based interventions, this study potentially offers a blueprint for a feasible and effective approach to improving outcomes in this population.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov, identifier NCT04218201, January 6, 2020.

Aligning public health and public safety: Probation as a touchpoint to identify and link patients with opioid use disorder to opioid agonist treatment

BACKGROUND

People in criminal justice settings (CJS) have high rates of opioid use disorder (OUD) and HIV. Probation is part of the CJS and congregates many individuals with high rates of mental health and substance use disorders relative to the general population; nevertheless, probation remains a major improvement to incarceration. As a steppingstone to full decarceration efforts, community supervision settings like probation can be leveraged as "touchpoints" to identify and link people with OUD (and other co-morbid conditions) to treatment and reduce criminal activity.

METHODOLOGY

To determine the feasibility of a modified screening, brief intervention and referral to treatment (SBIRT) strategy to link probationers to opioid agonist therapies (OAT) in the newly created probation system in Ukraine, we conducted a single-arm SBIRT intervention in eight probation centers in four Ukrainian administrative regions. For those screening positive for OUD, interest in OAT was assessed before and after a brief intervention. Those interested in OAT were referred to community OAT services. Participants with OUD also underwent HIV testing.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

Of the 1,298 consecutive individuals screened, 208 (16.0%) met criteria for opioid dependence. Of these, 122 (58.7%) enrolled in brief intervention, of which 54 (44.3%) had HIV and 14 (25.9%) of these were newly diagnosed. After the brief intervention, interest in starting OAT increased significantly from a median of 7.0 to 8.0 (P = <0.001) using a 10-point scale. Thirty (N = 30; 24.6%) of the enrolled participants initiated OAT and 21 of these (70%) were retained in treatment for 6 months.

SIGNIFICANCE

The prevalence of OUD (and HIV) is high among people in probation in Ukraine. SBIRT can identify a large number of people eligible for OAT, many of whom were willing to initiate and remain on OAT. Integrating SBIRT into probation can potentially assist with OAT scale-up and help address HIV prevention efforts.

Investigating for Whom Brief Substance Use Interventions Are Most Effective: An Individual Participant Data Meta-analysis

Prior research suggests that brief interventions (BIs) for alcohol and other drug use may vary in effectiveness across patient sociodemographic factors. The objective of this individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis was to explore for whom BIs delivered in general healthcare settings are more or less effective. We examined variability in BI effects by patient age, sex, employment, education, relationship status, and baseline severity of substance use using a two-stage IPD meta-analysis approach. All trials included in a parent aggregate data meta-analysis (k = 116) were invited to contribute IPD, and 29 trials provided patient-level data (12,074 participants). Among females, BIs led to significant reductions in binge alcohol consumption ([Formula: see text] = 0.09, 95% CI [0.03, 0.14]), frequency of alcohol consumption ([Formula: see text] = 0.10, 95% CI [0.03, 0.17]), and alcohol-related consequences ([Formula: see text] = 0.16, 95% CI [0.08, 0.25]), as well as greater substance use treatment utilization ([Formula: see text] = 0.25, 95% CI [0.21, 0.30]). BIs yielded larger reductions in frequency of alcohol consumption at 3-month follow-up for individuals with less than a high school level education ([Formula: see text] = 0.16, 95% CI [0.09, 0.22]). Given evidence demonstrating modest BI effects on alcohol use and mixed or null findings for BI effects on other drug use, BI research should continue to investigate potential drivers of effect magnitude and variation.  PROTOCOL REGISTRATION DETAILS: The protocol for this review was pre-registered in PROSPERO #CRD42018086832 and the analysis plan was pre-registered in OSF: osf.io/m48g6.

A scoping literature review of pharmacy-based opioid misuse screening and brief interventions

BACKGROUND

Although prescription opioid dispensing rates have continued to decrease, overdose deaths involving prescription opioids have increased during the COVID-19 pandemic. Screening and brief interventions (SBI) are an effective prevention strategy to identify and address opioid misuse and safety risks. Emerging literature on pharmacy-based SBI needs to be systematically appraised to develop robust interventions.

OBJECTIVE

Our objective was to conduct a scoping review of the literature regarding pharmacy-based opioid misuse SBI to identify relevant literature that explore the topic, evaluate the patient-centeredness of included studies, and explore the use of dissemination and implementation science in the literature.

METHODS

The review was conducted according to Preferred Reporting of Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses -Scoping reviews (PRISMA-Sc) guidelines. We searched PubMed, CINHAL, PsychInfo, and Scopus for studies regarding pharmacy-based SBI, published in the last 20 years. We also conducted a separate grey literature search. Two of three total reviewers screened each abstract individually and identified eligible full-texts for inclusion. We critically appraised quality of included studies and qualitatively synthesized the relevant information.

RESULTS

The search resulted in 21 studies (categorized as intervention, descriptive, and observational research) and 3 grey literature reports. Of the recently published 21 studies, 11 were observational research, with six interventions in the pilot stages. Screening tools varied but naloxone was the brief intervention in 15 of the 24 results. Only eight studies had high validity, reliability, and applicability and only five were patient-centered. Implementation science principles were addressed in eight studies (mainly interventions). Overall, the findings suggest high potential for evidence-based SBI to be successful.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, the review suggested a strong lack of a patient-centered and implementation science-focused approach to designing pharmacy-based opioid misuse SBI. Findings suggest that a patient-centered, implementation focused approach is needed for effective and sustained pharmacy-based opioid misuse SBI.

Efficacy of Brief Interventions for Comorbid Substance Misuse in Patients on Opioid Agonist Treatment: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Multiple substance use is a common but underrecognized problem in patients on opioid agonist treatment (OAT). Co-occurring substance misuse is associated with poor clinical and psychosocial outcomes. We aimed ( a ) to determine the effect of screening and brief intervention (SBI) for substance misuse in people on OAT and (b) to qualitatively summarize the implementation of SBI.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review of clinical trials on the efficacy of SBI for alcohol and drug misuse in participants on OAT. We searched 5 electronic databases and included published studies and unpublished trials. We measured the standardized mean difference in substance risk scores before and after intervention. We also estimated the standardized mean difference in alcohol consumption per day before and after intervention.

RESULTS

We included a total of 8 studies; 5 of these were included in the meta-analysis, and all were reviewed for narrative synthesis. We observed a significant change in the pre-post brief intervention substance risk scores with a medium effect size (Hedges g = 0.752, 95% confidence interval, 0.405-1.099). Sensitivity analyses with different pretest-posttest correlations did not change our result. Modest effects of SBI were found in reducing both alcohol and illicit drug risk scores, and among the population on methadone and buprenorphine treatment. We also observed a significant decrease in alcohol consumption per day 3 months after SBI. Studies showed a limited and incomplete screening for substance misuse and delivery of brief intervention in OAT settings.

CONCLUSIONS

Screening and brief intervention may be a potential treatment for co-occurring substance misuse among patients on OAT.

Screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment (SBIRT) for cannabis: A scoping review

INTRODUCTION

Screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment (SBIRT) has been used to change substance use behavior. Despite cannabis being the most prevalent federally illicit substance, we have limited understanding of use of SBIRT for managing cannabis use. This review aimed to summarize the literature on SBIRT for cannabis use across age groups and contexts over the last two decades.

METHODS

This scoping review followed the a priori guide outlined by the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Scoping Reviews and Meta-Analyses) statement. We gathered articles from PsycINFO, PubMed, Sage Journals Online, ScienceDirect, and SpringerLink.

RESULTS

The final analysis includes forty-four articles. Results indicate inconsistent implementation of universal screens and suggest screens assessing cannabis-specific consequences and utilizing normative data may increase patient engagement. Broadly, SBIRT for cannabis demonstrates high acceptability. However, the impact of SBIRT on behavior change across various modifications to intervention content and modality has been inconsistent. In adults, patients with primary cannabis use are not engaging in recommended treatment at similar rates to other substances. Results also suggest a lack of research addressing referral to treatment in adolescents and emerging adults.

DISCUSSION

Based on this review, we offer several to improve each component of SBRIT that may increase implementation of screens, effectiveness of brief interventions, and engagement in follow-up treatment.

Assist-linked brief intervention to reduce risky pattern of substance use in male workers employed at a tertiary care hospital in India: A randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Substance use in workplace leads to adverse effects both on the employees and on the workplace. Existing research focuses on alcohol-related harm, while workplace use of other substances has been neglected. There are no randomized controlled studies of brief interventions in Indian hospital settings.

AIM

To evaluate the efficacy of World Health Organization (WHO) alcohol, smoking, and substance involvement screening test (ASSIST)-linked brief intervention (ALBI) for reducing risky patterns of substance use in male workers at a tertiary-care hospital in North India.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The study was conducted in two phases. In Phase-I, a random list of 400 employees was generated from the entire pool of male hospital workers, of which 360 participated. Data on the ASSIST risk categories (mild, moderate, and high) were generated from Phase I. In Phase-II, moderate- or high-risk subjects ('ASSIST screen-positive') were randomized into intervention and control groups, with 35 screen-positive subjects in each group. The intervention group was provided a 15-30-min structured session per ALBI protocol, while the control group was given a 15-30-min general talk on health-related consequences associated with substance use. The subjects were compared on ASSIST score, WHO quality-of-life brief version (WHOQOL-BREF) and readiness to change questionnaire (RCQ) at baseline and at 3-month follow up.

RESULTS

The prevalence of moderate-to-high-risk use of tobacco, alcohol, and cannabis in the total sample was 28.6%, 27.5%, and 6.9%, respectively. At 3-months postintervention follow-up of the randomized sample, recipients of ALBI had significant reduction of ASSIST scores for all substances compared to the control group (p < 0.001). More participants receiving ALBI were ready to change to RCQ action stage (p values for tobacco, alcohol, and cannabis <0.001, <0.001 and 0.007, respectively). WHOQOL-BREF scores significantly improved in ALBI group across all domains.

CONCLUSION

ALBI was effective in reducing risky substance use, increasing readiness to change and improving the QOL of the subjects at workplace setting.

Antiepileptic Drug Adherence and Its Associated Factors among Epilepsy Patients on Follow-ups at Amanuel Mental Specialized Hospital, Ethiopia

BACKGROUND

Medication adherence is a fundamental determinant of effective treatment. However, people with epilepsy have poor compliance with their treatment because of the chronic nature of the disease. Limited studies have been conducted to address antiepileptic medication adherence in Africa, including Ethiopia. Thus, the aim of this study was to assess antiepileptic drug adherence and its asociated factors among patients with epilepsy attending outpatient department of Amanuel Mental Specialized Hospital.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study design was conducted on 439 patients with epilepsy in Amanuel Mental Specialized Hospital. Medication adherence reporting scale-5 (MARS-5) was used to assess adherence to antiepileptic drugs. The Oslo social support, Jacob perceived stigma scale, and hospital anxiety and depression scale (HADS) were the instruments used to assess associated factors. Simple and multiple linear regression analysis models were fitted. Then, the adjusted unstandardized beta (β) coefficient at a 95% confidence level was used.

RESULTS

The mean(SD) score of antiepileptic medication adherence was 16.38(±3.76) with 95%CI:(16.03, 16.72). Depressive symptoms (β= -1.35, 95% CI: (-2.04, -0.65)), anxiety symptoms (β=-1.12,95%CI:(-1,79,-0.44), perceived stigma (β= -1.64, 95% CI:-2.16,-1.12), being single (β=-0.67, 95%CI:-1.20,-0.14), presence of seizure per month(β=-2.11,95% CI: (-2.81,-1.41) and antiepileptic drug adverse effect(β=-0.07,95%CI:-0.11,-0.03) were factors associated with anti-epileptic medication adherence.

CONCLUSIONS

The results suggest that the mean score of adherence to antiepileptic drugs was poor as compared to other settings. Antiepileptic medication adherence screening tool should be included in the patient's treatment protocol.

Online randomised factorial trial of electronic Screening and Brief Intervention for alcohol use in pregnancy: a study protocol

INTRODUCTION

Approximately 1 in 7 pregnant women in the USA report past-month alcohol use. Strong evidence connects prenatal alcohol exposure with a range of adverse perinatal outcomes, including the spectrum of conditions known as fetal alcohol spectrum disorders. Screening and Brief Intervention (SBI) has been recommended for pregnant women but has proven difficult to implement. This study will test the efficacy of single-session technology-delivered SBI (electronic SBI) for alcohol use in pregnancy, while simultaneously evaluating the possible additional benefit of tailored text messages and/or booster sessions in a 3×2 factorial trial.

METHOD AND ANALYSIS

This full factorial trial will use online advertising and clinic-based flyers to recruit pregnant women meeting criteria for unhealthy alcohol use, and randomly assign them to one of six conditions crossing three levels of brief intervention (none, single 120-minute session and single session plus two 5-minute boosters) with two levels of tailored text messaging (none vs twice weekly messages). The primary analysis will test for dose-response effects of the brief intervention on alcohol abstinence, defined as no self-report of alcohol use in the 90 days prior to 34 weeks' gestation, and negative results for ethyl glucuronide analysis of fingernail samples. Secondary analyses will examine main and interaction effects of tailored text messaging as well as intervention effects on birth outcomes.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval was provided by the Michigan State University Biomedical and Health Institutional Review Board (STUDY00005298). Results will be presented at conferences and community forums, in addition to being published in a peer-reviewed journal. Intervention content demonstrating sufficient efficacy and safety will be made publicly available.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ClinicalTrials.gov Registry (NCT04332172).

The Status of SBIRT Training in Health Professions Education: A Cross-Discipline Review and Evaluation of SBIRT Curricula and Educational Research

PURPOSE

To assess the quality of curricular research on the Screening Brief Intervention and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) approach and determine the presence of useful training modalities, particularly motivational interviewing (MI) training, across health care training curricula.

METHOD

The authors conducted a systematic review of published, peer-reviewed studies in PubMed, ERIC, CINAHL, Ovid HealthSTAR, and PsycINFO databases through March 2021 for English-language studies describing SBIRT, a curriculum for health care trainees, and curricular intervention outcomes. After the records were independently assessed, data were extracted and 20% of the studies were double-coded for interrater reliability.

RESULTS

Of 1,856 studies, 95 were included in the review; 22 had overlapping samples and were consolidated into 10 nested studies, leaving 83 total. Interrater reliability ranged from moderate (κ = .74, P < .001) to strong (κ = .91, P < .001) agreement. SBIRT training was delivered to trainees across many professions, including nursing (n = 34, 41%), medical residency (n = 28, 34%), and social work (n = 24, 29%). Nearly every study described SBIRT training methods (n = 80, 96%), and most reported training in MI (n = 54, 65%). On average, studies reported 4.06 (SD = 1.64) different SBIRT training methods and 3.31 (SD = 1.59) MI training methods. Their mean design score was 1.92 (SD = 0.84) and mean measurement score was 1.89 (SD = 1.05). A minority of studies measured SBIRT/MI skill (n = 23, 28%), and 4 studies (5%) set a priori benchmarks for their curricula.

CONCLUSIONS

SBIRT training has been delivered to a wide range of health care trainees and often includes MI. Rigor scores for the studies were generally low due to limited research designs and infrequent use of objective skill measurement. Future work should include predefined training benchmarks and validated skills measurement.

Magnitude and factors associated with treatment non-adherence among patients with depressive disorders at St. Amanuel Mental Specialized Hospital, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 2019: A cross sectional study

Background

Inadequate adherence to treatment is among the main underlying causes of depression becoming a chronic problem. In developing countries due to limited access to health care, inaccurate diagnoses, and scarcity of medications, poor adherence may become an even larger obstacle in the treatment of depression. The current study aims to assess the magnitude and factors related to treatment non-adherence among patients with depressive disorders.

Objective

To assess the magnitude and factors associated with treatment non adherence among patients with depressive disorders at St. Amanuel Mental Specialized Hospital, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 2019.

Methods

A hospital-based cross-sectional study was conducted among 415 respondents using systematic random sampling technique. Medication adherence was assessed by using Medication Adherence Rating Scale. Data was entered to Epi-data version 3.1 and analyzed using SPSS version 20. Binary logistic analysis was done and P-values less than 0.05 were considered statistically significant.

Results

The prevalence of treatment non-adherence among patients with depressive disorders was 26% (95%CI; 21.2, 32.5). Previous suicide attempt (AOR = 3.05, 95%CI; 1.82, 5.12), medication side effects (AOR = 2.46, 95%CI; 1.47, 4.11), moderate to high self-stigma (AOR = 2.60, 95%CI; 1.45, 4.66), and poor quality of life (AOR = 2.47, 95%CI; 1.42, 4.28) were significantly associated with treatment non-adherence among patients with depressive disorders.

Conclusion and recommendation

Treatment non-adherence is a common problem among patients being treated for depressive disorders. Previous suicide attempts, medication side effects, moderate to high self-stigma, and poor quality of life were significantly associated with treatment non-adherence. Appropriate interventions should be developed to promote measures to facilitate adherence in this group of patients, and address the associated factors when applicable.

Efficacy of Brief Intervention for Unhealthy Drug Use in Outpatient Medical Care: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The efficacy of brief intervention (BI) for unhealthy drug use in outpatient medical care has not been sufficiently substantiated through meta-analysis despite its ongoing global delivery. This study aims to determine the efficacy of BI for unhealthy drug use and the expected length of effects, and describe subgroup analyses by outpatient setting.

METHODS

Trials comparing BI with usual care controls were retrieved through four databases up to January 13, 2021. Two reviewers independently screened, selected, and extracted data. Primary outcomes included drug use frequency (days used) and severity on validated scales at 4-8 months and were analyzed using random-effects model meta-analysis.

RESULTS

In total, 20 studies with 9182 randomized patients were included. There was insufficient evidence to support the efficacy of BI for unhealthy drug use among all outpatient medical care settings for use frequency (SMD = -0.07, 95% CI = -0.17, 0.02, p = 0.12, I² = 37%, high certainty of evidence) and severity (SMD = -0.27, 95% CI = -0.78, 0.24, p = 0.30, I² = 98%, low certainty of evidence). However, post hoc subgroup analyses uncovered significant effects for use frequency by setting (interaction p = 0.02), with significant small effects only in emergency departments (SMD = -0.15, 95% CI = -0.25, -0.04, p < 0.01). Primary care, student health, women's health, and HIV primary care subgroups were nonsignificant. Primary care BI revealed nonsignificant greater average use in the treatment group compared to usual care.

DISCUSSION

BI for unhealthy drug use lacks evidence of efficacy among all outpatient medical settings. However, small effects found in emergency departments may indicate incremental benefits for some patients. Clinical decisions for SBI or specialty treatment program referrals should be carefully considered accounting for these small effects in emergency departments.

REGISTRATION

PROSPERO (CRD42020157733).

Effects of brief substance use interventions delivered in general medical settings: a systematic review and meta-analysis

AIMS

To estimate effects of brief substance use interventions delivered in general medical settings.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials conducted since 1990 of brief substance use interventions in patients of any age or severity level recruited in general medical settings. Primary outcomes were any measure of substance use or substance-related consequences (indexed with Hedges' g and risk ratios). Mixed-effects meta-regressions were used to estimate overall effects and predictors of effect variability. Analyses were conducted separately by brief intervention (BI) target substance: alcohol only or drugs.

FINDINGS

A total of 116 trials (64 439 participants) were identified; 111 (62 263 participants) provided effect size data and were included in the meta-analysis. Drug-targeted BIs yielded significant small improvements in multiple drug/mixed substance use (Hedges' g (g¯ ) = 0.08; 95% CI = 0.002, 0.15), but after adjusting for multiple comparisons, they did not produce significant effects on cannabis use ( g¯ = 0.06; 95% CI = 0.001, 0.12), alcohol use ( g¯ = 0.08; 95% CI = -0.0003, 0.17), or consequences ( g¯ = 0.05; 95% CI = 0.01, 0.10). Drug-targeted BIs yielded larger improvements in multiple drug/mixed substance use when delivered by a general practitioner ( g¯ = 0.19; 95% CI = 0.187, 0.193). Alcohol-targeted BIs yielded small beneficial effects on alcohol use ( g¯ = 0.12; 95% CI 0.08, 0.16), but no evidence of an effect on consequences ( g¯ = 0.05; 95% CI = -0.04, 0.13). However, alcohol-targeted BIs only had beneficial effects on alcohol use when delivered in general medical settings (g¯ = 0.17; 95% CI = 0.10, 0.24); the findings were inconclusive for those delivered in emergency department/trauma centers ( g¯ = 0.05; 95% CI = 0.00, 0.10).

CONCLUSIONS

When delivered in general medical settings, alcohol-targeted brief interventions may produce small beneficial reductions in drinking (equivalent to a reduction in 1 drinking day per month). There is limited evidence regarding the effects of drug-targeted brief interventions on drug use.

Interventions to Reduce Hospital and Emergency Department Utilization Among People With Alcohol and Substance Use Disorders: A Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

Substance use disorders (SUDs), prevalent worldwide, are associated with significant morbidity and health care utilization.

OBJECTIVES

To identify interventions addressing hospital and emergency department utilization among people with substance use, to summarize findings for those seeking to implement such interventions, and to articulate gaps that can be addressed by future research.

RESEARCH DESIGN

A scoping review of the literature. We searched PubMed, PsycInfo, and Google Scholar for any articles published from January 2010 to June 2020. The main search terms included the target population of adults with substance use or SUDs, the outcomes of hospital and emergency department utilization, and interventions aimed at improving these outcomes in the target population.

SUBJECTS

Adults with substance use or SUDs, including alcohol use.

MEASURES

Hospital and emergency department utilization.

RESULTS

Our initial search identified 1807 titles, from which 44 articles were included in the review. Most interventions were implemented in the United States (n=35). Half focused on people using any substance (n=22) and a quarter on opioids (n=12). The tested approaches varied and included postdischarge services, medications, legislation, and counseling, among others. The majority of study designs were retrospective cohort studies (n=31).

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, we found few studies assessing interventions to reduce health care utilization among people with SUDs. The studies that we did identify differed across multiple domains and included few randomized trials. Study heterogeneity limits our ability to compare interventions or to recommend one specific approach to reducing health care utilization among this high-risk population.

The acceptability and feasibility of screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment for pain management among new England veterans with chronic pain: A pilot study

OBJECTIVES

Musculoskeletal disorders often lead to chronic pain in Veterans. Chronic pain puts sufferers at risk for substance misuse, and early intervention is needed for both conditions. This pilot study tested the feasibility and acceptability of a Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment for Pain Management intervention (SBIRT-PM) to help engage Veterans seeking disability compensation for painful musculoskeletal disorders in multimodal pain treatment and to reduce risky substance use, when indicated.

METHODS

This pilot study enrolled 40 Veterans from 8 medical centers across New England in up to 4 sessions of telephone-based counseling using a motivational interviewing framework. Counseling provided education about, and facilitated engagement in, multimodal pain treatments. Study eligibility required Veterans be engaged in no more than 2 Veteran Affairs (VA) pain treatment modalities, and study participation involved a 12-week postassessment and semistructured interview about the counseling process.

RESULTS

Majorities of enrolled Veterans screened positive for comorbid depression and problematic substance use. Regarding the offered counseling, 80% of participants engaged in at least one session, with a mean of 3 sessions completed. Ninety percent of participants completed the postassessment. Numerically, most measures improved slightly from baseline to week 12. In semistructured interviews, participants described satisfaction with learning about new pain care services, obtaining assistance connecting to services, and receiving support from their counselors.

DISCUSSION

It was feasible to deliver SBIRT-PM to Veterans across New England to promote engagement in multimodal pain treatment and to track study outcomes over 12 weeks. Preliminary results suggest SBIRT-PM was well-received and has promise for the targeted outcomes.

Leveraging technology to address unhealthy drug use in primary care: Effectiveness of the Substance use Screening and Intervention Tool (SUSIT)

Background: Screening for unhealthy drug use is now recommended for adult primary care patients, but primary care providers (PCPs) generally lack the time and knowledge required to screen and deliver an intervention during the medical visit. To address these barriers, we developed a tablet computer-based 'Substance Use Screening and Intervention Tool (SUSIT)'. Using the SUSIT, patients self-administer screening questionnaires prior to the medical visit, and results are presented to the PCP at the point of care, paired with clinical decision support (CDS) that guides them in providing a brief intervention (BI) for unhealthy drug use. Methods: PCPs and their patients with moderate-risk drug use were recruited from primary care and HIV clinics. A pre-post design compared a control 'screening only' (SO) period to an intervention 'SUSIT' period. Unique patients were enrolled in each period. In both conditions, patients completed screening and identified their drug of most concern (DOMC) before the visit, and completed a questionnaire about BI delivery by the PCP after the visit. In the SUSIT condition only, PCPs received the tablet with the patient's screening results and CDS. Multilevel models with random intercepts and patients nested within PCPs examined the effect of the SUSIT intervention on PCP delivery of BI. Results: 20 PCPs and 79 patients (42 SO, 37 SUSIT) participated. Most patients had moderate-risk marijuana use (92.4%), and selected marijuana as the DOMC (68.4%). Moderate-risk use of drugs other than marijuana included cocaine (15.2%), hallucinogens (12.7%), and sedatives (12.7%). Compared to the SO condition, patients in SUSIT had higher odds of receiving any BI for drug use, with an adjusted odds ratio of 11.59 (95% confidence interval: 3.39, 39.25), and received more elements of BI for drug use. Conclusions: The SUSIT significantly increased delivery of BI for drug use by PCPs during routine primary care encounters.

Clinical Recognition of Substance Use Disorders in Medicaid Primary Care Associated With Universal Screening, Brief Intervention and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT)

OBJECTIVE

Screening, Brief Intervention and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) programs have been effective for moderate reductions of alcohol use among participants in universal settings. However, there has been limited evidence of effectiveness in referring individuals to specialty care, and the literature now often refers to screening and brief intervention (SBI). This study examines documentation of substance use disorder (SUD) diagnoses in a low-income Medicaid population to evaluate the effect of universal SBIRT on healthcare system recognition of SUDs, a first step to obtaining a referral to treatment (RT) for individuals with SUDs.

METHOD

SBI patient data from Wisconsin's Initiative to Promote Healthy Lifestyles (WIPHL) were linked to Wisconsin Medicaid claims data. A comparison group of Medicaid beneficiaries was identified from a matched sample of non-SBIRT clinics (total study N = 14,856). Hierarchical generalized linear modeling was used to assess rates of SUD diagnosis in the 12 months following receipt of SBIRT in WIPHL clinics compared with rates in non-SBIRT clinics. Analysis controlled for clinic, individual patient's health status, demographics, and baseline substance use diagnoses.

RESULTS

SBIRT was associated with greater odds of being diagnosed with Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition (DSM-IV), alcohol abuse or dependence as well as drug abuse or dependence over the 12 months subsequent to receipt of the screen. The overall diagnostic rate for any DSM-IV substance abuse or dependence was 9.9% at baseline and 12.2% during the follow-up year. SBIRT patients had 42% (p = .003) greater odds of being diagnosed with a substance use disorder within 12 months relative to comparison clinic patients. However, there were very few claims for specialty SUD services.

CONCLUSIONS

The presence of SBIRT in a primary care clinic appears to increase the awareness and recognition of patients with SUDs and a greater willingness of healthcare providers to diagnose patients with an alcohol or drug use disorder on Medicaid claims. Further research is needed to determine if this increase in diagnosis reflects integrated care for SUDs or if it leads to improved access to specialty care, in which case abandonment of the RT component of SBIRT may be premature.

Clinical Recognition of Substance Use Disorders in Medicaid Primary Care Associated With Universal Screening, Brief Intervention and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT)

OBJECTIVE

Screening, Brief Intervention and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) programs have been effective for moderate reductions of alcohol use among participants in universal settings. However, there has been limited evidence of effectiveness in referring individuals to specialty care, and the literature now often refers to screening and brief intervention (SBI). This study examines documentation of substance use disorder (SUD) diagnoses in a low-income Medicaid population to evaluate the effect of universal SBIRT on healthcare system recognition of SUDs, a first step to obtaining a referral to treatment (RT) for individuals with SUDs.

METHOD

SBI patient data from Wisconsin's Initiative to Promote Healthy Lifestyles (WIPHL) were linked to Wisconsin Medicaid claims data. A comparison group of Medicaid beneficiaries was identified from a matched sample of non-SBIRT clinics (total study N = 14,856). Hierarchical generalized linear modeling was used to assess rates of SUD diagnosis in the 12 months following receipt of SBIRT in WIPHL clinics compared with rates in non-SBIRT clinics. Analysis controlled for clinic, individual patient's health status, demographics, and baseline substance use diagnoses.

RESULTS

SBIRT was associated with greater odds of being diagnosed with Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition (DSM-IV), alcohol abuse or dependence as well as drug abuse or dependence over the 12 months subsequent to receipt of the screen. The overall diagnostic rate for any DSM-IV substance abuse or dependence was 9.9% at baseline and 12.2% during the follow-up year. SBIRT patients had 42% (p = .003) greater odds of being diagnosed with a substance use disorder within 12 months relative to comparison clinic patients. However, there were very few claims for specialty SUD services.

CONCLUSIONS

The presence of SBIRT in a primary care clinic appears to increase the awareness and recognition of patients with SUDs and a greater willingness of healthcare providers to diagnose patients with an alcohol or drug use disorder on Medicaid claims. Further research is needed to determine if this increase in diagnosis reflects integrated care for SUDs or if it leads to improved access to specialty care, in which case abandonment of the RT component of SBIRT may be premature.

State of the Art in Substance Use Prevention and Early Intervention: Applications to Pediatric Primary Care Settings

With changes to drug-related policies and increased availability of many drugs, we currently face a public health crisis related to substance use and associated health consequences. Substance use and substance use disorders (SU/SUDs) are complex developmental disorders with etiologies that emerge through the intergenerational transmission of biological, familial, and environmental factors. The family ecosystem both influences and is influenced by SU/SUDs, particularly in children and adolescents. Family dynamics and parent functioning and behaviors can represent either risk or protective factors for the development of SU/SUDs in children. Primary care providers who provide care for children, adolescents, and families are in an ideal position to deliver prevention messages and to intervene early in the development of substance misuse and SUD among their patients. Despite recommendations from the American Academy of Pediatrics, few pediatric primary care providers provide anticipatory guidance to prevent or screen for substance misuse. Many barriers to those practices can be overcome through the integration and application of findings from the field of prevention science and the many lessons learned from the implementation of evidence-based interventions. Consideration of the implications of prevention science findings would help clarify the relevant roles and responsibilities of the primary care clinician, and the benefit of referral to and consultation from addiction specialists. Additionally, the past decade has seen the development and validation of a continuum of evidence-based prevention and early SU/SUD intervention activities that can be adapted for use in primary care settings making wide-spread implementation of prevention feasible. We propose a paradigm shift away from a model based on diagnosis and pathology to one upstream, that of family-focused prevention and early intervention. Adapting and scaling out empirically based prevention and early SU/SUD interventions to primary care settings and removing barriers to collaborative care across primary care, addiction medicine, and mental health providers offer the potential to meaningfully impact intergenerational transmission of SU/SUD — addressing a leading health problem facing our nation.

Reimagining brief interventions for alcohol: towards a paradigm fit for the twenty first century? : INEBRIA Nick Heather Lecture 2019: This lecture celebrates the work of Nick Heather in leading thinking in respect of both brief interventions and wider alcohol sciences

Background

There is no longer support for the idea that brief intervention programmes alone can contribute meaningfully to the improvement of population health relating to alcohol. As a result, calls for major innovations and paradigm shifts grow, notably among research leaders.

This paper briefly examines the history of the development of the evidence-base from the landmark World Health Organisation projects on Screening and Brief Intervention (SBI) in the 1980s onwards. Particular attention is given to weaknesses in the theorisation of social influence and interventions design, and declining effect sizes over time. Although the old SBI paradigm may be exhausted where it has been applied, it has not been replaced by a new paradigm. Alcohol marketing encourages heavy drinking and today may have more powerful effects on thinking about alcohol, and about alcohol problems, than previously. The nature of the societal challenge being faced in an alcogenic environment in which alcohol is widely promoted and weakly regulated underpins consideration of the possibilities for contemporary evidence-informed public health responses. Evidence-informed perspectives in discourses on alcohol problems need to be strengthened in redeveloping rationales for brief interventions. This process needs to move away from sole reliance on a model based on a two-person discussion of alcohol, which is divorced from wider concerns the person may have. Reimagining the nature of brief interventions involves incorporating digital content, emphasising meso-level social processes based on material that people want to share, and seeking synergies with macro-level population and media issues, including alcohol policy measures.

Conclusions

Current versions of brief interventions may be simply too weak to contend with the pressures of an alcogenic environment. A new generation of brief interventions could have a key role to play in developing multi-level responses to the problems caused by alcohol.

Associations of cannabis use frequency and cannabis use disorder with receiving a substance use screen and healthcare professional discussion of substance use

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment (SBIRT) can reduce substance use, but receipt of these services by those who use cannabis frequently and have cannabis use disorder (CUD) remains unexplored. We examined cannabis use frequency and CUD's associations with the odds of receiving a substance use screening and a healthcare professional discussion among those who used healthcare services.

METHODS

Data came from the 2015-2019 National Survey on Drug Use and Health (N = 214,505 aged 18+). Among adults who used cannabis and attended healthcare settings in the past year (N = 36,374), multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to examine associations of cannabis use frequency and CUD with receiving a substance use screen and substance use discussion by a healthcare professional.

RESULTS

Cannabis use frequency was associated with higher odds of receiving a screen (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 1.27, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.14-1.41 for 300+ days of use) and a discussion among those screened (AOR = 1.83, 95% CI = 1.60-2.09 for 300+ days of use). CUD was not associated with receiving a screen, but it was positively associated with receiving a discussion among those screened (AOR = 1.22, 95% CI = 1.08-1.39). Nonmedical users were less likely to have a discussion among those screened and not screened.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

Findings indicate disparities in screening and discussion of substance use with patients, especially between medical and nonmedical users.

SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE

Study findings provide novel insight into differences in the reach of SBIRT services among adult cannabis users.

SBIRT administered by mental health counselors for hospitalized adults with substance misuse or disordered use: Evaluating hospital utilization and costs

OBJECTIVE

We analyzed the association of Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) with hospitalizations, emergency department (ED) visits, and related costs, when administered to inpatients with substance misuse or disordered use by professional mental health counselors.

METHODS

Our study used retrospective program and health records data and a difference-in-differences design with propensity score covariates. The study population consisted of hospital inpatients admitted to integrated care services staffed by physicians, nurses, and mental health counselors. The intervention group consisted of patients selected for intervention based on substance use history and receiving SBIRT (n = 1577). Patients selected for intervention but discharged before SBIRT administration (n = 618) formed the comparison group. The outcome variables were hospitalization and ED visits costs and counts. Costs of hospitalizations and ED visits were combined to allow sufficient data for analysis, with counts treated similarly. Patient-level variables were substance use type and substance use severity. A cluster variable was inpatient clinical service. Zero-censored and two-part logistic and generalized linear models with robust standard errors tested the association of SBIRT interventions with the outcomes.

RESULTS

For the full study population of patients using alcohol, illicit drugs, or both, SBIRT administered by mental health counselors was not associated with changes in hospitalizations and ED visits. For patients with alcohol misuse or disordered use, SBIRT by mental health counselors was associated an odds ratio of 0.32 (p < .001) of having subsequent hospitalizations or ED visits. For patients with alcohol use who did return as hospital inpatients or to the ED, SBIRT by counselors was associated with a reduction in costs of $2547 per patient (p < .001) and with an incidence rate ratio of 0.57 for counts (p = .003).

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest that professional mental health counselors on inpatient integrated care teams may provide SBIRT effectively for patients with misuse and disordered use of alcohol, reducing the likelihood of future healthcare utilization and costs.

Treatment of opioid use disorder in primary care

Opioid use disorder (OUD) is a common, treatable chronic disease that can be effectively managed in primary care settings. Untreated OUD is associated with considerable morbidity and mortality-notably, overdose, infectious complications of injecting drug use, and profoundly diminished quality of life. Withdrawal management and medication tapers are ineffective and are associated with increased rates of relapse and death. Pharmacotherapy is the evidence based mainstay of OUD treatment, and many studies support its integration into primary care settings. Evidence is strongest for the opioid agonists buprenorphine and methadone, which randomized controlled trials have shown to decrease illicit opioid use and mortality. Discontinuation of opioid agonist therapy is associated with increased rates of relapse and mortality. Less evidence is available for the opioid antagonist extended release naltrexone, with a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials showing decreased illicit opioid use but no effect on mortality. Treating OUD in primary care settings is cost effective, improves outcomes for both OUD and other medical comorbidities, and is highly acceptable to patients. Evidence on whether behavioral interventions improve outcomes for patients receiving pharmacotherapy is mixed, with guidelines promoting voluntary engagement in psychosocial supports, including counseling. Further work is needed to promote the integration of OUD treatment into primary care and to overcome regulatory barriers to integrating methadone into primary care treatment in the US.

Molecular Insights into COVID-19 Pathophysiology, Immune Pathogenesis, Detection, and Treatment

In late December 2019, a new kind of Coronavirus called severe acute respiratory syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) was officially identified in Wuhan, China. In March 2020, SARS-CoV-2 was declared a pandemic by the World Health Organization (WHO), and it has infected millions of people worldwide. SARS-CoV-2 is a highly contagious Coronavirus, which has led to an outbreak of acute respiratory tract infection called "Coronavirus disease 2019" (COVID-19), resulting in mild to severe respiratory infections in humans. The design of appropriate therapeutic approaches is dependent on the understanding of molecular and cellular pathways of Coronavirus infections. In this study, we summarized the characteristic features of SARS-CoV-2. In addition, we considered the recent information regarding COVID-19 molecular immune pathogenesis, diagnosis, and potential treatment, which may provide novel perspectives and therapeutic goals in combating SARS-CoV-2.

Brief Interventions for Cannabis Use in Healthcare Settings: Systematic Review and Meta-analyses of Randomized Trials

OBJECTIVES

The efficacy of brief interventions for cannabis use was assessed in a systematic review and meta-analyses.

METHODS

Systematic searches in academic databases were conducted, and reference lists of included studies were reviewed. Randomized trials were included that compared brief interventions with minimal control interventions for improving cannabis-specific outcomes among participants recruited from healthcare settings. Mean differences (MDs) based on change-from-baseline measurements were pooled using random-effects meta-analyses, with stratification by short term (≤3 months) and long term (>3 months).

RESULTS

Ten reports from 9 studies were included. Most studies were conducted in the United States, including participants who were adults and were recruited from primary care or emergency departments. There were no significant effects of brief interventions on cannabis-specific Alcohol, Smoking and Substance Involvement Screening Test (ASSIST) scores in the short term (MD -1.27 points; 95% confidence interval [CI] -3.75, 1.21; I 84.40%). The null pattern of findings was also observed for number of days of cannabis use in the past 30 days in the short term (MD -0.22 days; 95% CI -2.27, 1.82; I 60.30%) and long term (MD -0.28 days; 95% CI -2.42, 1.86; I 60.50%). The evidence base for other outcomes not subjected to meta-analyses was limited and mixed.

CONCLUSIONS

Brief interventions did not result in reductions in cannabis-specific ASSIST scores or number of days of cannabis use, whereas the evidence base for other outcomes was limited and mixed. As such, brief interventions in healthcare settings may not be efficacious for cannabis use.

Recent and active problematic substance use among primary care patients: Results from the alcohol, smoking, and substance involvement screening test in a multisite study

Background: Primary care settings provide salient opportunities for identifying patients with problematic substance use and addressing unmet treatment need. The aim of this study was to examine the extent and correlates of problematic substance use by substance-specific risk categories among primary care patients to inform screening/intervention efforts. Methods: Data were analyzed from 2000 adult primary care patients aged ≥18 years (56% female) across 5 clinics in the eastern U.S. Participants completed the Alcohol, Smoking and Substance Involvement Screening Test (ASSIST). Prevalence and ASSIST-defined risk-level of tobacco use, alcohol use, and nonmedical/illicit drug use was examined. Multinomial logistic regression models analyzed the demographic correlates of substance use risk-levels. Results: Among the total sample, the prevalence of any past 3-month use was 53.9% for alcohol, 42.0% for tobacco, 24.2% for any illicit/Rx drug, and 5.3% for opioids; the prevalence of ASSIST-defined moderate/high-risk use was 45.1% for tobacco, 29.0% for any illicit/Rx drug, 14.2% for alcohol, and 9.1% for opioids. Differences in the extent and risk-levels of substance use by sex, race/ethnicity, and age group were observed. Adjusted logistic regression showed that male sex, white race, not being married, and having less education were associated with increased odds of moderate/high-risk use scores for each substance category; older ages (versus ages 18-25 years) were associated with increased odds of moderate/high-risk opioid use. Conclusions: Intervention need for problematic substance use was prevalent in this sample. Providers should maintain awareness and screen for problematic substance use more consistently in identified high risk populations.

Knowledge, Attitude and Practice Towards COVID-19 in Ethiopia: A Systematic Review; 2020

BACKGROUND

Novel coronavirus disease is a very fast spreading respiratory disease. This disease is becoming a public health emergency across the world. Despite many efforts by countries, organizations, and institutions to prevent and control, the pandemic remains a world health danger. Ethiopia is one of the countries which is severely affected by the pandemic. However, a systematic review of the knowledge, attitude, and practice about coronavirus disease in Ethiopia has not previously done. Thus, the main aim of this systematic review is to investigate the status of people's knowledge, attitude, and practice about coronavirus disease preventive measures in Ethiopia in 2020.

METHODS

Data were extracted based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Studies were accessed through electronic web-based search from PubMed, Cochrane Library, Google, Google Scholar, and Embase. All statistical analyses were done using Stata version 11 software with a random-effects model.

RESULTS

A total of 11 studies with 3818 participants were included in this systematic review and the overall estimated status of the knowledge, attitude, and practice about coronavirus in Ethiopia are 61.78%, 72.39%, and 52.83%, respectively. According to region subgroup analysis, the highest estimated statuses of the knowledge, attitude, and practice are 74% in Tigray, 86.13% in Southern nations, nationalities, and Peoples' of the region, and 72% in Tigray region, respectively. Subgroup analysis was done based on the focused group and way of questionnaire administration.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review revealed people's knowledge, attitude, and practice about coronavirus disease preventive measures were generally more than 50%. However, government and every individual should address those behaviors stipulated by the World Health Organization and Center for Communicable Disease and Control guidelines to prevent coronavirus disease.

Assessment of Psychological Distress and Associated Factors among Hospitalized Patients During the COVID-19 Pandemic at Selected Hospitals in Southwest Ethiopia

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to assess the prevalence of psychological distress and associated factors among hospitalized patients during the COVID-19 pandemic at three selected hospitals in southwest Ethiopia.

METHODS

An institution-based cross-sectional study design was conducted among hospitalized patients during the COVID-19 pandemic at Mizan-Tepi University Teaching Hospital, Tepi General Hospital, and Gebre Tsadik Shawo General Hospital, southwest Ethiopia from May 10 to August 10, 2020. Sample size was computed using a single-proportion formula, and systematic sampling was employed to recruit study participants. Data were collected using a structured interviewer-administered questionnaire. Psychological distress was assessed with the Kessler Psychological Distress Scale, which has been validated in Ethiopia. SPSS 21.0 was used for analysis. Descriptive statistics were calculated to characteristize the study population. Predictors of psychological distress were identified by logistic regression analyses.

RESULTS

Among the 337 study participants enrolled, about 41% were aged 25-34 years. The overall prevalence of psychological distress was 57.9% (95% CI 52.8%-63.5%). Being female (AOR 3.69, 95% CI 2.08-6.55), having high (AOR 5.45, 95% CI 2.35-12.66) and medium perceived life threat (AOR 3.37, 95% CI 1.75-6.48), poor (AOR 3.97, 95% CI 1.70-9.29) and moderate social support (AOR 3.17, 95% CI 1.36-7.41), and current khat use (AOR 4.16, 95% CI 1.67-10.35) were statistically associated with psychological distress during the COVID-19 pandemic at P value <0.05.

CONCLUSION

The prevalence of psychological distress was high among hospitalized patients during the COVID-19 pandemic. The study findings highlight the need to develop psychological support strategies to improve mental health and psychological resilience.

Motivational Interviewing for Cannabis Use Disorders: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Cannabis is one of the most used drugs worldwide. There is no gold standard treatment for cannabis use disorder (CUD). Motivational interviewing (MI) has shown efficacy in some substance use disorders. Therefore, a systematic review was conducted to assess the effectiveness of MI in CUD.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials or open-label studies published until September 2019 from 3 different databases (Pubmed, Scopus, and PsycINFO) were included, following the PRISMA guidelines and a predetermined set of criteria for article selection. Meta-analyses were conducted. The end point was determined as month 3, and 4 outcomes were analysed (abstinence rates, reduction in frequency of use, reduction in quantity of use, and reduction in cannabis use disorder symptoms) in 2 populations (adolescents and adults).

RESULTS

Forty studies were identified, of which 24 were performed in adults and 16 in adolescents. MI showed efficacy in achieving abstinence in both adults (odds ratio [OR] = 3.84, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.40-6.16, p < 0.0001) and adolescents (OR = 2.02, 95% CI 1.42-2.89, p < 0.0001). MI showed efficacy in reducing frequency and quantity of use in adults but not in adolescents. Those adults who were in the MI group consumed less joints per day than those in the control group (mean difference = -0.69 joints per day, 95% CI -0.84 to -0.53, p < 0.001), and they consumed on less days per month (mean difference = -3.9 days per month, 95% CI -7.47 to -0.34, p = 0.0317) than those in the control group.

CONCLUSIONS

MI is an effective intervention to reduce cannabis use and achieve abstinence, especially among adults and patients with no prior history of psychotic disorder. Further investigation is needed to assess the effect on CUD symptoms. MI should be included in guidelines for treating cannabis use disorder as one of the essential psychological interventions.

Quality of Life and Associated Factors Among Patients with Epilepsy Attending Outpatient Department of Saint Amanuel Mental Specialized Hospital, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 2019

Background

Epilepsy is strongly associated with an impaired quality of life. Patients suffering from epilepsy have a poorer quality of life than both the general population and many other chronic disease sufferers. However, attention is not given on the quality of life of people with epilepsy other than focusing on symptom reduction. This increases the frequency of seizures, impacts on the ability to perform and increases health-related costs. The aim of this study was to assess quality of life and associated factors among patients with epilepsy attending the outpatient department of Amanuel Mental Specialized Hospital, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

Methods

An institution-based cross-sectional study design was conducted between May and June 2019 at Amanuel Mental Specialized Hospital. A systematic random sampling technique was used to get a total number of 447 samples. Data on quality of life was assessed through interviews using the World Health Organization Quality of Life—Brief (WHOQOL-BREF) Version. The collected data were coded, entered into EpiData 3.1, and analyzed by using SPSS version 20. Simple and multiple linear regression analysis models were fitted and the unstandardized β coefficient at 95% confidence interval was employed. The statistical significance was accepted at p-value <0.05.

Results

The mean score of quality of life was 61.1±11.6 (95%CI: 59.05, 61.23). Perceived stigma (β=−2.13, 95%CI:–2.96, −1.30), frequent seizure (β=−3.16, 95%CI: -4.27, −2.04), AED adherence (β=1.24, 95%CI: 1.10, 1.30), antiepileptic drug side effect (β=−0.32, 95%CI: -0.38, −0.26), anxiety (β-1.91, 95%CI: –2.95, −0.86), depression (β=−3.59, 95%CI: –4.67, −2.52), poor social support (β=−2.51, 95%CI: –3.62, −1.40) and moderate social support (β=−1.60, 95%CI: –2.58, −0.62) were significantly associated factors with quality of life.

Conclusion

The finding from this study indicated that quality of life of patients with epilepsy were moderate. Perceived stigma, frequent seizure, comorbid depression and anxiety, antiepileptic drug nonadherence, antiepileptic drug side effect and poor social support were the predictors of quality of life.

Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment for Pain Management for Veterans Seeking Service-Connection Payments for Musculoskeletal Disorders: SBIRT-PM Study Protocol

Background

Veterans with significant chronic pain from musculoskeletal disorders are at risk of substance misuse. Veterans whose condition is the result of military service may be eligible for a disability pension. Department of Veterans Affairs compensation examinations, which determine the degree of disability and whether it was connected to military service, represent an opportunity to engage Veterans in pain management and substance use treatments. A multisite randomized clinical trial is testing the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment for Pain Management (SBIRT-PM) for Veterans seeking compensation for musculoskeletal disorders. This telephone-based intervention is delivered through a hub-and-spoke configuration.

Design

This study is a two-arm, parallel-group, 36-week, multisite randomized controlled single-blind trial. It will randomize 1,100 Veterans experiencing pain and seeking service-connection for musculoskeletal disorders to either SBIRT-PM or usual care across eight New England VA medical centers. The study balances pragmatic with explanatory methodological features. Primary outcomes are pain severity and number of substances misused. Nonpharmacological pain management and substance use services utilization are tracked in the trial.

Summary

Early trial enrollment targets were met across sites. SBIRT-PM could help Veterans, at the time of their compensation claims, use multimodal pain treatments and reduce existing substance misuse. Strategies to address COVID-19 pandemic impacts on the SBIRT-PM protocol have been developed to maintain its pragmatic and exploratory integrity.

The short-term impact on economic outcomes of SBIRT interventions implemented in reproductive health care settings

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the impact of screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment (SBIRT) administered in reproductive health care settings on a variety of economic outcomes, including general health care utilization, criminal activity, and motor vehicle crashes. Whether and by how much SBIRT affects economic outcomes are important unanswered questions related to the economic impact of this technique.

METHODS

We collected data as part of a randomized clinical trial that examined whether SBIRT delivered electronically (e-SBIRT) or by a clinician (SBIRT) is superior to enhanced usual care (EUC) for substance misuse. Participants were a convenience sample of 439 women from two reproductive health care centers who used cigarettes, risky amounts of alcohol, illicit drugs, or misused prescription medication. For each participant, we measured economic outcomes by self-report 6 months pre- and post-intervention. We used difference-in-differences regression models to estimate the impact of e-SBIRT and SBIRT, compared to EUC, on changes in each of the economic outcomes from pre- to post-intervention.

RESULTS

None of the difference-in-differences estimates weas statistically significant after adjusting for multiple comparisons.

CONCLUSION

In a population of women receiving routine care in reproductive health care settings, we did not find a significant effect of either e-SBIRT or SBIRT, compared to EUC, on general health care utilization, criminal activity, or motor vehicle outcomes. However, individual trials are typically underpowered to detect effects that are small but important from a public health perspective. These results may be crucial for future systematic reviews and meta-analyses to determine the economic impact of SBIRT programs from a variety of perspectives.

Knowledge, Attitude, and Precautionary Measures Towards COVID-19 Among Medical Visitors at the University of Gondar Comprehensive Specialized Hospital Northwest Ethiopia

BACKGROUND

Novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is an emerging respiratory disease caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus. It was designated a public health emergency of international concern on January 30, 2020. COVID-19 has no effective treatment; nonetheless, early recognition of the disease and applying prevention strategies will help to mitigate the virus propagation.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to assess the knowledge, attitude, and precautionary measures of medical center visitors at the University of Gondar Comprehensive Specialized Hospital, Northwest Ethiopia.

METHODS

An institutional-based cross-sectional study was conducted from July 15 to August 15, 2020. A consecutive sampling technique was used to select the study participants. Data were collected by using a pre-tested structured, self-administered questionnaire. Data were analyzed using SPSS version 20. To explain the study variables, frequency tables, figures, and percentages were used. Bivariable and multivariable logistic regressions were used to see the association between independent and dependent variables.

RESULTS

The prevalence of poor knowledge, attitude, and precautionary measures was 42.2%, 39%, and 41.6%, respectively. Being female (AOR=2.79, 95% CI=1.752-4.44), divorced (AOR=0.29, 95% CI=0.09-0.88), and residing in a rural location (AOR=1.93, 95% CI=1.07-3.26) were significantly associated with poor knowledge. Being female (AOR=95%, CI=1.21-2.98), a farmer (AOR=4.13, 95% CI=1.60-10.63), residing in a rural location (AOR=2.53, 95% CI=1.31-4.88), poor knowledge (AOR=2.38, 95% CI=1.52-3.72), and negative attitude (AOR=3.25, 95% CI=2.07-5.09) were significantly associated with poor precautionary measures. Increasing income in one unit of Ethiopian birr (ETB) (AOR=0.26, 95% CI=0.031-0.051) was significantly associated with negative attitude.

CONCLUSION

The finding of this study showed that more than one-third of the participants had poor knowledge, attitude, and precautionary measures towards COVID-19 disease. A comprehensive health education program concerning knowledge, attitude, and precautionary measures toward COVID-19 ought to be strengthened.

Cannabis use, other drug use, and risk of subsequent acute care in primary care patients

BACKGROUND

Cannabis and other drug use is associated with adverse health events, but little is known about the association of routine clinical screening for cannabis or other drug use and acute care utilization. This study evaluated whether self-reported frequency of cannabis or other drug use was associated with subsequent acute care.

METHOD

This retrospective cohort study used EHR and claims data from 8 sites in Washington State that implemented annual substance use screening. Eligible adult primary care patients (N = 47,447) completed screens for cannabis (N = 45,647) and/or other drug use, including illegal drug use and prescription medication misuse, (N = 45,255) from 3/3/15-10/1/2016. Separate single-item screens assessed frequency of past-year cannabis and other drug use: never, less than monthly, monthly, weekly, daily/almost daily. An indicator of acute care utilization measured any urgent care, emergency department visits, or hospitalizations ≤19 months after screening. Adjusted Cox proportional hazards models estimated risk of acute care.

RESULTS

Patients were predominantly non-Hispanic White. Those reporting cannabis use less than monthly (Hazard Ratio [HR] = 1.12, 95 % CI = 1.03-1.21) or daily (HR = 1.24; 1.10-1.39) had greater risk of acute care during follow-up than those reporting no use. Patients reporting other drug use less than monthly (HR = 1.34; 1.13-1.59), weekly (HR = 2.21; 1.46-3.35), or daily (HR = 2.53; 1.86-3.45) had greater risk of acute care than those reporting no other drug use.

CONCLUSION

Population-based screening for cannabis and other drug use in primary care may have utility for understanding risk of subsequent acute care. It is unclear whether findings will generalize to U.S. states with broader racial/ethnic diversity.

Integrating Mental Health and Addiction Treatment Into General Medical Care: The Role of Policy

Interventions that integrate care for mental illness or substance use disorders into general medical care settings have been shown to improve patient outcomes in clinical trials, but efficacious models are complex and difficult to scale up in real-world practice settings. Existing payment policies have proven inadequate to facilitate adoption of effective integrated care models. This article provides an overview of evidence-based models of integrated care, discusses the key elements of such models, considers how existing policies have fallen short, and outlines future policy strategies. Priorities include payment policies that adequately support structural elements of integrated care and incentivize multidisciplinary team formation and accountability for patient outcomes, as well as policies to expand the specialty mental health and addiction treatment workforce and address the social determinants of health that disproportionately influence health and well-being among people with mental illness or substance use disorders.

Low theoretical fidelity hinders the research on health coaching for opioid reduction: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials

Purpose

To systematically review the literature in order to evaluate the effects of health coaching on patients’ reduction of opioid usage and opioid discontinuation. In addition, this systematic review investigated the effects of health coaching on pain intensity, physical function, and quality of life.

Methods

Four electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and PsychINFO) were searched from inception to December 2019. Randomized controlled trials assessing the effects of health coaching interventions in adult patients currently using opioids were included. We considered trials if they included any of the four defined key constructs of health coaching adopted in this review: motivational interviewing, positive psychology, the transtheoretical model, and self-determination theory Independent reviewers screened and selected studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias using Revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials (RoB2) and quality of evidence using Grading, Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE). The review is registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) databased as CRD42019136201. It was not possible to perform a meta-analysis due to heterogeneity between included trials.

Results

Eleven studies met our inclusion criteria (n = 4,516 participants). No study assessed all four constructs of health coaching. All eleven studies utilized only one of the constructs, brief motivational interviewing. Thus, we reported our results in terms of motivational interviewing. There is conflicting and very low quality of evidence that brief motivational interviewing may or may not be more effective than education to reduce opioid usage. There is very low quality of evidence that brief motivational interviewing is more effective than educational monthly diaries to reduce opioid use. There is very low to low quality of evidence that brief motivational interviewing is not more effective than no behavioral intervention to reduce opioid use at 6 months follow-up, treatment as usual (TAU) to improve overdose risk behaviors, and TAU to improve physical and psychological health.

Conclusion

There is no direct evidence related to the effect of health coaching on opioid reduction. There is limited, low quality evidence to conclude brief motivational interviewing reduces opioid usage in opioid-dependent patients. Future research should focus on the impact of high theoretical health coaching interventions on opioid usage.

Brief Behavioral Interventions for Substance Use in Adolescents: A Meta-analysis

CONTEXT

Adolescents with problematic substance use (SU) are at risk for far-reaching adverse outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

Synthesize the evidence regarding the effects of brief behavioral interventions for adolescents (12-20 years) with problematic SU.

DATA SOURCES

We conducted literature searches in Medline, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and PsycInfo through October 31, 2019.

STUDY SELECTION

We screened 33 272 records and citations for interventions in adolescents with at least problematic SU, retrieved 1831 articles, and selected 22 randomized controlled trials of brief interventions meeting eligibility criteria for meta-analysis.

DATA EXTRACTION

We followed Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality guidelines. We categorized brief interventions into components, including motivational interviewing (MI), psychoeducation, and treatment as usual. Outcomes included SU (abstinence, days used per month) for alcohol and cannabis, and substance-related problem scales. Strength of evidence (SoE) was assessed.

RESULTS

Both pairwise and network meta-analyses were conducted by using random effects models. Compared to treatment as usual, the use of MI reduces heavy alcohol use days by 0.7 days per month (95% credible interval [CrI]: -1.6 to 0.02; low SoE), alcohol use days by 1.1 days per month (95% CrI -2.2 to -0.3; moderate SoE), and overall substance-related problems by a standardized net mean difference of 0.5 (95% CrI -1.0 to 0; low SoE). The use of MI did not reduce cannabis use days, with a net mean difference of -0.05 days per month (95% CrI: -0.26 to 0.14; moderate SoE).

LIMITATIONS

There was lack of consistently reported outcomes and limited available comparisons.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of MI reduces heavy alcohol use, alcohol use days, and SU-related problems in adolescents but does not reduce cannabis use days.

Inpatient link to peer recovery coaching: Results from a pilot randomized control trial

BACKGROUND

Few individuals hospitalized with Substance Use Disorder (SUD) complications participate in recovery support services after discharge. Peer recovery coaching represents one potential new method for promoting recovery.

METHODS

A six-month prospective randomized controlled trial compared outcomes between the standard of care and a physician-initiated recovery coaching intervention. The primary outcome measure was engagement in recovery support services, and the secondary outcome measures were substance use frequency and self-reported physical and mental health using the SF-12 survey. Participants (N = 98) were eligible if they were identified by a healthcare provider as having a SUD and were hospitalized due to SUD complications.

RESULTS

Engagement rate over the six-month post-discharge time period was higher for participants in the recovery coaching intervention (84 %, 95 % CI: 78%-91%) compared to the standard of care control condition (34 %, 95 % CI: 25 %-44 %), log OR = 28.59, p < .001. No overall group differences in substance use frequency (p = .80), self-reported physical (p = .69) or mental (p = .89) health were observed.

CONCLUSION

An inpatient linkage to recovery coaching services improves engagement rates and can feasibly be implemented in a single-center inpatient service. This intervention is promising for promoting both short-term and long-term engagement in recovery support services.

Alcohol screening and brief intervention in emergency departments: Review of the impact on healthcare costs and utilization

PURPOSE

To review the published evidence of the impact of alcohol screening and brief intervention (SBI) delivered in emergency departments (EDs) on healthcare utilization and costs.

PRINCIPAL RESULTS

This scoping review used existing literature reviews supplemented with an electronic database. We included studies if they assessed SBIs for alcohol delivered in an ED setting and reported healthcare utilization and/or costs. We abstracted methodological approaches and healthcare utilization outcomes from each study and categorized them based on substance of focus (alcohol only vs. alcohol and other substances). We updated cost estimates from each study to 2018 U.S. dollars. We identified seven studies published between 2010 and 2019 that met study inclusion criteria. Two of the seven studies evaluated SBI that targeted both alcohol and other substances. Six studies found a reduction in healthcare utilization or costs, and one found an increase in healthcare utilization.

MAJOR CONCLUSIONS

This literature review suggests that SBI delivered in ED settings can be a cost-reducing approach to treating excessive alcohol consumption, a factor that policy-makers and payers might consider in prioritizing interventions.

Screening and brief intervention for lower-risk drug use in primary care: A pilot randomized trial

AIMS

The efficacy of screening and brief intervention for lower-risk drug use is unknown. This pilot study tested the efficacy of two brief interventions (BIs) for drug use compared to no BI in primary care patients with lower-risk drug use identified by screening.

METHODS

We randomly assigned participants identified by screening with Alcohol Smoking and Substance Involvement Screening Test (ASSIST) drug specific scores of 2 or 3 to: no BI, a brief negotiated interview (BNI), or an adaptation of motivational interviewing (MOTIV). Primary outcome was number of days use of main drug in the past 30 as determined by validated calendar method at 6 months. Analyses were performed using negative binomial regression adjusted for baseline use and main drug.

RESULTS

Of 142 eligible adults, 61(43 %) consented and were randomized. Participant characteristics were: mean age 41; 54 % male; 77 % black. Main drug was cannabis 70 %, cocaine 15 %, prescription opioid 10 %; 7% reported injection drug use and mean days use of main drug (of 30) was 3.4. At 6 months, 93 % completed follow-up and adjusted mean days use of main drug were 6.4 (no BI) vs 2.1 (BNI) (incidence rate ratio, IRR 0.33[0.15-0.74]) and 2.3 (MOTIV) (IRR 0.36[0.15-0.85]).

CONCLUSIONS

BI appears to have efficacy for preventing an increase in drug use in primary care patients with lower-risk use identified by screening. These findings raise the potential that less severe patterns of drug use in primary care may be uniquely amenable to brief intervention and warrant replication.

Medical Student Attitudes Toward Substance Use Disorders Before and After a Skills-Based Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) Curriculum

PURPOSE

Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) is an evidence-based framework for assessing and addressing risky substance use. This study evaluated the substance-related attitudes of medical students who participated in an Enhanced Pre-Clinical SBIRT Curriculum designed to reduce stigma, help students empathize with the experiences of people using alcohol and drugs, understand substance use in-context, and feel more optimistic about efforts to prevent and treat substance use disorders (SUDs).

METHODS

Students (N=118; 73.8% of eligible) completed the Attitudes and Opinions Survey for alcohol and drugs before and after this 2-year, multi-modality curriculum. The authors classified attitudes as "positive" or "negative" and grouped students by pre-post attitudinal change: persistently negative, persistently positive, negative-to-positive, positive-to-negative. Using chi-square tests, the authors assessed differences by sex, race/ethnicity, and whether students had a family member or friend with an SUD.

RESULTS

Most students (>90%) reported persistently positive attitudes regarding physicians in recovery, societal contributions of patients with SUDs; ability to learn from such patients; and general attitudes toward SUD treatment. This skewed distribution precluded the investigation of subgroup differences. Fewer students reported persistently positive attitudes regarding SUD patients' healthcare utilization (alcohol 58.5%; drug 57.8%) and impact on other patients' care (alcohol 73.7%; drug 72.4%), compared to other attitudinal domains (at p-values < 0.0001 in the McNemar's tests). Approximately, 1 in 5 students reported more negative healthcare utilization attitudes on follow-up. There were no demographic differences in these two attitudinal domains.

CONCLUSION

Unlike previous studies of medical student attitudes, most students who participated in the Enhanced Pre-Clinical SBIRT Curriculum reported an enduring appreciation for the educational and societal contributions of patients with SUDs. Attitudes toward healthcare utilization and the impact of patients with SUDs on the care of other patients were more resistant to change, possibly due to the predominance of acute-care inpatient settings in clinical training.

Screening for Unhealthy Drug Use: Updated Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force

IMPORTANCE

Illicit drug use is among the most common causes of preventable morbidity and mortality in the US.

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review the literature on screening and interventions for drug use to inform the US Preventive Services Task Force.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, PubMed, PsycINFO, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials through September 18, 2018; literature surveillance through September 21, 2019.

STUDY SELECTION

Test accuracy studies to detect drug misuse and randomized clinical trials of screening and interventions to reduce drug use.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Critical appraisal and data abstraction by 2 reviewers and random-effects meta-analyses.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Sensitivity, specificity, drug use and other health, social, and legal outcomes.

RESULTS

Ninety-nine studies (N = 84 206) were included. Twenty-eight studies (n = 65 720) addressed drug screening accuracy. Among adults, sensitivity and specificity of screening tools for detecting unhealthy drug use ranged from 0.71 to 0.94 and 0.87 to 0.97, respectively. Interventions to reduce drug use were evaluated in 52 trials (n = 15 659) of psychosocial interventions, 7 trials (n = 1109) of opioid agonist therapy, and 13 trials (n = 1718) of naltrexone. Psychosocial interventions were associated with increased likelihood of drug use abstinence (15 trials, n = 3636; relative risk [RR], 1.60 [95% CI, 1.24 to 2.13]; absolute risk difference [ARD], 9% [95% CI, 5% to 15%]) and reduced number of drug use days (19 trials, n = 5085; mean difference, -0.49 day in the last 7 days [95% CI, -0.85 to -0.13]) vs no psychosocial intervention at 3- to 4-month follow-up. In treatment-seeking populations, opioid agonist therapy and naltrexone were associated with decreased risk of drug use relapse (4 trials, n = 567; RR, 0.75 [95% CI, 0.59 to 0.82]; ARD, -35% [95% CI, -67% to -3%] and 12 trials, n = 1599; RR, 0.73 [95% CI, 0.62 to 0.85]; ARD, -18% [95% CI, -26% to -10%], respectively) vs placebo or no medication. While evidence on harms was limited, it indicated no increased risk of serious adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Several screening instruments with acceptable sensitivity and specificity are available to screen for drug use, although there is no direct evidence on the benefits or harms of screening. Pharmacotherapy and psychosocial interventions are effective at improving drug use outcomes, but evidence of effectiveness remains primarily derived from trials conducted in treatment-seeking populations.

Substance Use Disorder Assessment, Diagnosis, and Management for Patients Hospitalized With Severe Infections Due to Injection Drug Use

OBJECTIVES

Persons with injection drug use (IDU) have high healthcare utilization. Consequently, healthcare providers have opportunities to identify and treat underlying substance use disorders (SUD) that drive these hospitalizations. The study purpose was to characterize current SUD evaluation and treatment practices by primary and consulting services during hospitalization for severe infections related to IDU.

METHODS

This study is a retrospective chart review of inpatient admissions to an academic medical center. The 2 inclusion criteria were documentation of IDU in clinical notes and the presence of an infection likely related to IDU. Demographic and clinical data were extracted from electronic medical records.

RESULTS

A total of 108 inpatient admissions met inclusion criteria and were included in the study. The most common infections related to IDU were endocarditis (n = 65, 60.2%) and osteomyelitis (n = 27, 25.0%). The primary team explicitly documented substance use in the H&P and progress notes in 103 (95.4%) hospitalizations and in 84 (77.8%) at discharge. Opioid use disorder was coded by International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision in 62 (57.4%). The most frequent intervention was screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment in 99 (91.7%) episodes. The vast majority of patients did not have specific plans or recommendations for SUD treatment upon discharge.

CONCLUSIONS

Though more than half of the patients in this study had opioid use disorder, pharmacotherapy for opioid use disorder was typically not provided, and screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment (SBIRT) was the most common intervention. There are significant gaps in the clinical assessment, diagnosis, and management of SUD in persons hospitalized with life-threatening complications of IDU, leaving many opportunities to improve care for this complex patient population.

Randomized Trial of Screening and Brief Intervention to Reduce Injury and Substance Abuse in an urban Level I Trauma Center

BACKGROUND

The TIP (Traumatic Injury Prevention) Project evaluated the impact on post-injury drug use of two brief motivational interventions compared to brief advice (BA) among injured patients who use drugs.

METHOD

Three-group, single blind, randomized controlled trial in a Level 1Trauma Center enrolled 395 admitted patients with drug positive toxicology screen or verbal report of drug use in the previous 30 days. 34% were Hispanic, 45% non-Hispanic White, 16% non-Hispanic Black. 88% smoked marijuana, 28% used cocaine and 11% prescription opioids. Brief Advice (BA) provided advice to abstain from drugs, educational materials and referral to community resources. Brief Motivational Intervention (BMI) additionally included a 30-45 minute session, with assessment feedback, based on motivational interviewing. BMI + B included a telephone booster 4-weeks post-intervention. Drug use as measured by percent days abstinent and total abstinence, derived from the Timeline Follow back was the primary outcome.

RESULTS

A significant reduction from baseline was observed at 3, 6, and 12 months in the primary outcomes of any drug use (excluding alcohol); cannabis and cocaine, the most frequently used drugs, were analyzed individually. There were no between group differences or group X time interactions. Similarly, there were no between groups differences on secondary outcomes including perceived health status, re-injury, arrest, incarceration, alcohol and drug treatment, employment, AA attendance, homelessness, physical abuse, and problems associated with alcohol and drug use.

CONCLUSIONS

The study does not support use of these enhanced motivational interventions over brief advice for trauma patients with a positive screen for drug use.

Compassionate Care of the Patient Who Uses Substances: Implications for the Infusion Nurse

Given the high rate of infection secondary to substance use, infusion nurses have a unique opportunity to compassionately engage individuals with substance use problems. Compassion is an essential ingredient of nursing practice, yet compassionate care of the individual who uses substances may seem difficult to navigate. This article provides the infusion nurse with the essential principles of compassionate care of the patient who uses substances. A fundamental understanding of how to work with patients who use substances may enhance the infusion nurse's practice.